ezd_pracownik_get_by_unit

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation, and the description adds the unit-scoping behavior. It does not disclose additional details such as pagination, ordering, or whether inactive employees are included, but for a simple read-only lookup this is acceptable.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition of schema details. It states the essential purpose efficiently.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a low-complexity read-only tool with a single required, well-documented parameter and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description is nearly complete. It does not explicitly describe the return shape, but the plural 'pracownikow' and the tool name make the list-like result reasonably clear.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters, including the required IdJednostki, are already documented in the schema. The description adds no further parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Pobierz' = get) and a specific resource ('pracownikow przypisanych do danej jednostki organizacyjnej' = employees assigned to a given organizational unit). This clearly identifies the action and selection scope, and distinguishes it from siblings like ezd_pracownik_get and ezd_pracownik_get_all.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The use case is implied by the scope: fetch employees belonging to one organizational unit. However, it does not explicitly explain when to choose this tool over alternatives such as ezd_pracownik_get_all, nor does it mention exclusions or conditions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.